There are times when you say WOW, what did I get for free, and others when you say you wasted your money!

Good: I wanted it for simple multi-WAN and load balancing, and it does that. And most of the things it claims to do... it does. And it has 5 Gigabit ports and you can even play with triple-WAN. And it has Omada Cloud with remote access and monitoring via mobile!!! It's affordable! What did I get, God!!!!

Bad: It has Omada Cloud without a server... so the server has to run on your end!!! as I learned the hard way, if your computer (the server we mentioned...) crashes or shuts down, OMADA is gone. And yes, the gods at TP-LINK took care of everything and you CANNOT access the interface at all, not even locally!!! because of course you have to register it with Omada!!! and the best part... if you remove it from OMADA, it doesn't keep the settings :((( And it has a difficult interface that you have to learn where to go and how... for God's sake (I'm talking about simple port-forwarding now). Of course, if you're a super IT guru and learn it... yes, you will get the job done.

I can't say more because I can't connect outside the local network when I want to and it has generally annoyed me a lot. I had Draytek (Vigor 2820 and 2830n) ADSL-DualWAN, expensive but incredible... and I had to change, unsuccessfully tried tp-Link TL-R470+ (more reliable but with 100 ethernet) and tried to save something... cry. It can do a lot, but I have the impression that whoever set it up didn't even work with it before releasing it, or it's only for IT professionals...

Guys, in general, I am satisfied. Below I present my experience so far.

I have set it up with load balancing on two lines that I have in my space.
One line is fiber optic 100/10 and the other is VDSL 50/5 with fiber optic up to the OTE cabinet and copper from there to my space.
So, for pure Load Balancing to work, you need to have the options "Enable Application Optimized Routing" and "Enable Bandwidth Based Balance Routing on port(s)" disabled.
If you have them enabled, then it divides your devices connected to the network (e.g. PC, mobile, etc.) into the two connections. Some will use wan1 and some will use wan2, not both simultaneously, and no device will have a speed of 150/15 (Mbps).
The above options ensure that your devices will go out to the internet with one WAN IP and not with two simultaneously, so you won't have problems with sites that read your IP, such as banks.
While if you only have load balancing enabled, you will go out with both WAN IPs, and some sites may think you are attacking them since they see your WAN IP constantly changing, but you will have a speed of 150/15 (Mbps) in speed tests.
I solved this problem in the following way. In the policy routing tab, I created a rule that applies to all devices on my network. I chose to route browsing traffic prioritizing wan1, and only if the internet is lost on wan1, then it will route it to wan2. So far, I haven't had any problems. I chose the fast connection for this specific rule.
However, here I have noticed a paradox. If I search "my WAN IP" on Google, it will show different sites that will tell me what my WAN IP is. If I go to the first site, it will only show me the WAN IP of the wan1 connection that I set in the rule.
If I choose a different site, it will only show me the WAN IP of the wan2 connection. In other words, no matter how many times I refresh my browser, it will always show the same WAN IP. At least both sites only read one IP, and this suits me because I'm fine with sites in general and I also have a speed of 150/15 ;-)
One last thing is that sometimes the router gets stuck and doesn't give me the speed immediately when I run a speed test.
It may initially give me a speed of 150/5 or 50/5 or 50/15, but if I run the speed test again on the spot, it gives me the normal 150/15 Mbps in all the tests I do.
I have done a firmware upgrade, but this problem still remains.
I believe it is a bug and will be fixed in a future firmware upgrade.
In conclusion, I want to say that I am satisfied with its capabilities and overall performance. For me, this router is 100% value for money!!!
I hope my experience proves useful to you.

During the upgrade of my Internet line to VDSL, I was forced to purchase a firewall. Previously, I had my own ADSL modem/router/firewall, but my provider no longer accepts such devices and forced me to accept their router (an extremely unacceptable Huawei DG8245V), otherwise I would not have phone service because they refused to give me the codes required for VoIP. Since the provider had full control over their router, I had to look for a firewall. Given that I already have the TP-Link Omada platform, with the hardware controller OC200 (also available in software), a corresponding Omada-compatible switch, and 2 Omada-compatible access points, it was natural for me to consider this firewall. However, I was not disappointed. Of course, when it is Omada-controlled, the firewall loses many of its advanced capabilities (see the data sheet for details), but what remains is perfectly fine. Additionally, the Omada platform is excellent for centralized network management (locally and/or via the cloud) and provides numerous security, traffic, and usage management capabilities, as well as monitoring statistics, traffic, events, alerts, etc. The firewall also provides ISP load-balancing, although I have not tested it. With a purchase cost of around 50 euros, it is a very good buy.
[update] I saw that version 2 of this firewall was released. An analysis of the differences shows improved performance, but nothing significant in terms of functionality. I don't think it makes a difference for a home or small office.